[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 46 (Tuesday, April 25, 2006)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E573-E574]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       GENERAL AVIATION SECURITY

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. STEVEN R. ROTHMAN

                             of new jersey

                    in the house of representatives

                        Tuesday, April 25, 2006

  Mr. ROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, the American people should be outraged to 
learn that all it takes to get on an on-demand charter flight at a 
general aviation airport is a credit card. You don't have to go through 
an x ray machine. No one is going to look into your carry-on bags. You 
and your friends can literally bring anything you want to on one of 
these flights and no one is going to stop you. According to the charter 
aviation industry this is actually a good thing and it represents 
advancement in security from the days where cash could get you a seat 
on one of these planes. And Mr. Speaker, I'm not talking here about 
small prop planes used by recreational pilots. Jets in the charter 
industry are larger, faster, and heavier than they used to be, 
therefore making them more like their commercial counterparts than ever 
before.
  One of the ten busiest general aviation airports in the country is in 
my district. Teterboro Airport is only 12 miles from New York City and 
handles a volume of over 200,000 flights every year, nearly equal to 
the number of flights at JFK International Airport. So far this year 
there have been three incidents at the airport, including one where a 
car crashed through the airport's chain link fence on January 12th. An 
18-year-old driver lost control of her Jeep and ran through the cyclone 
fence that separates a major roadway from parked planes. After going 
through the fence, the car actually crashed into a fully fueled plane 
parked on the tarmac causing damage to both the car and the plane. For 
those who have never driven by Teterboro, I'm sure it seems outrageous 
that a car could crash through the airport's fence and hit a plane. But 
it's true. This incident raises a question that all of us should be 
asking ourselves: If an 18-year-old can accidentally breach the 
security fence and drive straight onto the tarmac, into a fully fueled 
aircraft, at one of the busiest general aviation airports in the 
country, what could a motivated psychopath or terrorist do? Mr. 
Speaker, this incident speaks to the need for much greater security at 
general aviation airports.
  We know that our Nation remains an inviting target for terrorists and 
we would be foolish not to assume they are looking for vulnerabilities. 
If a terrorist had a chemical or biological weapon and needed an 
airborne delivery mechanism, it would be shamefully easy to commander 
an aircraft at an airport like Teterboro, fly that plane over New York 
City, less than 5 minutes flight time away, and deploy that weapon.
  The threat posed by lax security at general aviation airports does 
not begin and end with a car crashing through a fence. There are other 
very worrisome concerns, starting with the security and screening 
procedures for passengers boarding air taxi flights. Security 
procedures are actually nonexistent. Let me repeat, there are no 
security requirements for these passengers. That's right; no Federal 
agency requires any screening. In fact, passengers are not even 
required to show a license or have their baggage checked. All you need 
to do to hop on board an air taxi service flight is a credit card to 
buy your ticket. There's absolutely nothing else you need to do.
  So you might be wondering, if the Federal Aviation Administration and 
the Transportation Security Administration are not regulating security 
at general aviation airports, then who is? The industry is of course. 
To help them out, TSA worked with the charter industry to publish 
``Security Guidelines for General Aviation Airports'' in May of 2004. 
But none of these guidelines are mandatory. They offer suggestions and 
guidance, but the TSA does not require any local airport operators, 
owners, or users to put the guidelines to use. If we're not mandating 
security procedures, then what's the point of even having guidelines? 
Since there are no mandatory requirements, the threat to our Nation's 
security remains.
  The excuse for the inadequate security has been that it is impossible 
to provide a one-size-fits-all security plan for the Nation's 19,000 
general aviation airports. If that's true, then why isn't the TSA 
looking at airports in high risk locations? That seems like a 
reasonable place to start, but the TSA has not even done that.
  However, there has been one notable exception where the TSA stepped 
in and mandated tighter security for general aviation aircraft. Just a 
few miles away from the Capitol at Ronald Reagan National Airport, the 
TSA requires all general aviation flights leaving and coming into 
Reagan National to undergo special security procedures and all 
passengers must be screened by TSA. Now, I understand the threats that 
exist for flights around our Nation's Capitol. However, the same risks 
exist for my constituents in Northern New Jersey and for the people of 
Manhattan and New York who are at the same risk from flights taking off 
and landing at Teterboro Airport. Yet, the only thing the TSA has done 
to improve security at Teterboro is to require that flights to Reagan 
National follow the required safety precautions. This is just not 
enough.
  There clearly is nothing preventing a terrorist from taking out a 
credit card, buying a ticket on an air charter flight, showing up for 
the flight with a gun, a bomb, or even a weapon of mass destruction and 
stepping onto a jet. With no air marshal on board and a full tank of 
fuel, any general aviation jet could become the next weapon of mass 
destruction. If the TSA wanted to do something about this threat they 
would, but they haven't. They are putting all their efforts into 
preventing the kind of attacks we saw on 9-11 and putting their trust 
in the charter industry to protect our Nation from a new style of air-
based attack. In fact, the charter industry, which has seen dramatic 
growth since 9-11, markets itself based on its lax security procedures. 
They spend millions of dollars in advertising to the rich and powerful 
that the way to avoid the security hassles and inconvenience of 
commercial airports is to book a seat on a charter flight. They 
actually promote their own lack of security.
  Protecting our homeland is the responsibility of government. It's 
time for this Congress and the administration to open their eyes and 
address this urgent homeland security concern. This industry is 
expected to grow by as much as 25 percent in the next few years. We 
must do something now. I urge the Homeland Security and Transportation 
and Infrastructure Committees to address this issue and enact

[[Page E574]]

legislation that will keep America safe from the threat posed by the 
lack of security at general aviation airports.

                          ____________________